A RIBBON DEVELOPMENT STUDY IN ONTARIO, OREGON

by

SYLVIA L. CLARK

A RESEARCH PAPER

Submitted to

THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY

in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the
degree of

MASTERS OF SCIENCE

June 1978

Directed by
Dr. Ray M. Northam
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 1

Background on Ontario 4

Development along Highway 201

Questionnaire Used 10

Other Possible Arterials 21

Conclusion 25

Appendices

A. The Questionnaire 27

B. Analysis of the Questionnaire 35

 LIST OF FIGURES

Map of Study Area

Map of Alternatives 23

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Summary of Ranked Factors 20

Table 2. Economic Sector Rankings 20

 A RIBBON DEVELOPMENT STUDY IN ONTARIO, OREGON

ABSTRACT: There are conflicts between coniiiercial and agricul-

tural uses of land bordering U. S. Highway 201 southbound from

Ontario, Oregon. A questionnaire was developed and administered

to businesses located along Highway 201 to determine the most

important location factors for comercial users of the ribbon

development. The most important factors were central location,

customer access, land price, and lot size. An alternative to

continued development along Highway 201 which has all four of the

most important location factors was proposed to help protect

prime agricultural land bordering the highway. In addition,

commercial enterprises will be allowed to expand.

INTRODUCTION

The most obvious human needs for land are for food and fiber,

living space, industrial and commercial activity, transportation

facilities, and recreation. Many times these activities are in corn-

petition for the same land. Although rich in land resources, Malheur

County is vulnerable to increasing losses of agricultural land, and

much of the land being removed from agricultural use is among the most

capable of production in terms of soil quality, grade, irrigation, and

inherent fertility.

The trend has been that productivity of food and fiber has been

increasing while the amount of land involved has been decreasing.

However, a good share of the land leaving production is being trans-

 2

formed into irretrievable nonagricultural sectors.' The amount of

prime agricultural land available in Malheur County is about 17,500

acres, and a sound economic base for the county is totally involved

with agricultural production, which is in turn dependent on high

quality agricultural land.2

Ontario is the largest city in the county and is the growth

center with an estimated population of just under 8,OOO.3 Retail

trade and service industries in Ontario are increasing much more

rapidly than are agricultural industries. Therefore, there exists a

threat to prime agricultural land being developed by comercial

expansion. Because agriculture and commerce are both important to the

economy of Ontario, an investigation of nonagricultural productive

sites for commercial activities is needed.

This investigation will begin with background into Ontario's

population and economic structure. A background discussion will show

that growth in the area mandates careful analysis and a full under-

standing of conflicts between agriculture, and service and retail

trade. A particular conflict is occurring along U. S. Highway 201

southbound out of Ontario where commercial enterprises are being

developed on some of the best agricultural land in the area.

Commercial development and land capability along Highway 201 will

be investigated. There have been other studies on ribbon development

and they have determined that there are four types of business patterns:

1) the nucleation which ranges from isolated neighborhood grocery

stores to highly developed urban centers; 2) urban arterials, which

are also defined as nucleations, but when nucleated they locate on

 3

urban arterials. They too can differ in size according to differences

in traffic flow along the highway; 3) the automobile row includes

businesses such as auto dealers, used cars, food lockers, and motels,

and are associated with the specialized automobile district of larger

nucleations; and 4) highway-oriented uses which includes those busi-

ness types which are successful only when highway-oriented. (gas,

restaurant, motel, and fruit and vegetable produce.) There size is

also determined by the volume of traffic moving along the highway.4

It is not the purpose of this paper to determine the positive or

negative aspects of ribbon developments, but only that they exist

and perhaps that one arterial may be better than another for such

development. However, the consensus is that ribbon developments have

a negative effect on their communities. There is one researcher

though, which proposes that it is the secondary effects which create

the bulk of the problem, at least as far as traffic is concerned,

and not the development itself.5

It is important that city planners and developers not be per-

suaded to make value judgements in contradiction to the majority of

local residents involved. According to economic theory, businesses

would not locate on a ribbon development unless it is feasible for

them to net a profit, and they will not net a profit unless consumers

visit their establishments in adequate numbers. Ribbon developments

exist because relatively large numbers of people find them worthwhile.

A questionnaire was developed and administered to 73 per cent of

the businesses now located along Highway 201 to help determine why

they chose that particular site as the optimum location. It is hoped

 4

that the needs of coninercial enterprises in this area can be deter-

mined so that planners and developers can make intelligent decisions

relating to future development. The development, administration, and

surmiary concerning the questionnaire will be discussed.

Other arterials leading into the city will be examined according

to their suitability to ribbon development based on the results of

the questionnaire. If existing arterials cannot be found to be suit-

able, then an alternative will be suggested. Their suitability will

be determined by comparing the location to needs of commercial entities

as described in the questionnaire, plus their suitability compared to

the capability classification of the soil and the flood hazard

potential.

BACKGROUND ON ONTARIO

The control and management of commercial growth on highly pro-

ductive farmland is much more plausible in those cities where urban

sprawl has only just begun. Ontario, Oregon is such a city. Ontario

began as a small farming community with facilities necessary to support

the surrounding small family farms. As the farm size increased and the

number of people migrating from farm to city increased, just as it

did across the nation, the city of Ontario grew and has become a major

growth and retail/service center for the area.6

Population

It has been estimated that a 1 per cent change in population

produces a 1 percent change in the nuiiiber of retail establishments in

the area in which the change occurred.7 The population growth rate of
 5

Ontario is about 4 per cent each year and it has an estimated popula-

tion of about 8,000. In 1975 Ontario had about 32 per cent of the

county's population and is the largest city in Maiheur County. The

growth of Ontario is expected to continue and by the year 2000 the

population has been estimated to be between 12,000 and 15,000.8

Population is one of the determining variables for the amount of

land needed in an area for each land use activity. Included in popu-

lation analysis is migration, age mix and distribution, and projections

of population. The last decade in Malheur County showed a small

increase in population, but it was due to natural increases and not

because of fmmigration. It has been estimated though, that young,

educated adults, originally from the area have been returning to

Ontario in significant numbers in the last five to eight years.9

The past population trends for the county have been large percentages

of persons under the age of twenty and over forty. However, the pro-

jected 1980 mix is a substantial increase in age groups from twenty

to forty. It is estimated that these age groups will increase by about

80 per cent.'° Significantly large numbers of customers of service

and retail trade are in the age groups from twenty to forty. The

estimate, then, of 1 per cent change in puoulation producing a 1

per cent change in establishments may be short of the relationship

that is likely to occur in Ontario.

Economic Structure

Ontario's population growth reflects its growing importance as a

retail and service center. The city is a primary shopping center for

its residents, and for farmers in the region, and a secondary center
for the cities of Nyssa, Vale, and the nearby Idaho cities of Payette,

Fruitland, and Weiser.

The county's basic production (export) is dependent on high

quality agricultural land. The only industries in the county which

have significant location quotients (L.Q.) compared to the State are

manufacturing of food and kindred products (4.94), and agriculture

(4.42).12 The city of Ontario is not directly dependent on crop

production, but manufacturing of food and kindred products has a sig-

nificant L.Q. (1.67). Therefore, major industries in Ontario are

indirectly dependent on agriculture. Industries which show great

strength, in addition to food and kindred products, are retail trade

(L.Q. 1.55), services (L.Q. 1.13), and construction (L.Q. 1.03).

These industries are not only important as exporters, but they also

employ about 70 per cent of the work force in Ontario.'3

The need for land by agricultural industries may conflict with

the need for land by retail trade and service industries, particularly

along Highway 201 southbound from the city center. This ribbon

development is built over some of the best land suited for crop pro-

duction. It is also the area where commercial development has been

expanding. (Figure 1)

DEVELOPMENT ALONG HIGHWAY 201

U. S. Highway 201 is a major traffic artery leading into the

central business district (CBD) from the south and is the major route

traveled by farm residents living south of the city and by Nyssa and

Vale residents. The portion of the route under study begins west of
 7

Holy Rosary Hospital and ends north of Cairo Junction. (Figure 1)

Commercial development along this route segment began with a

small neighborhood grocery store in 1948. However, only 5.5 per cent

of the present businesses existed prior to 1960. Even from 1960 to

1965 the area saw only very small increases in the number of business

establishments (7.5 per cent of the present businesses). By 1970

though, 30 per cent of the Dresent businesses were established. At

this point in time the arterial had begun to take on the appearance of

a ribbon development. Its size and tenant make-up placed it in the

category of a community commercial center, which is defined as a

shopping area or center with twenty to forty business establishments

and a composition of predominantly shoppers goods outlets. It would

also include the convenience goods outlets located in neighborhood

centers. Convenience goods are defined as those most frequently

acquired by consumers where the individual purchase is relatively low

in cost and where the process does not generally include selective

buying. Shoppers goods include those that are less frequently acquired,

the cost is relatively high, and comparative shopping is common.14

The remaining establishments (70 per cent) were located along

Highway 201 following 1970. There is possibly one single driving

force which is responsible for this tremendous growth in the last

eight years. That force was the construction of a planned community

shopping center (West Park Plaza). Construction of the planned center

began in 1971, and what followed was a regional shopping development

along Highway 201. A regional center is defined to have from 40 to

200 functional units with frequent duplication of market types. It is

FIGURE 1
a center which markets convenience and shoppers goods, and also has

service establishments.'5 The ability of West Park Plaza to cause

such growth along Highway 201 is possibly the consequence of a process

called "pirating." Pirating refers to competitors which take advant-

age of the planned centers ability to draw customers.16

As was stated earlier the area's economic base is dependent on

agricultural production, which is in turn dependent on high quality

agriculturally productive land. The continued growth and southern

movement of retail and service development along }-!ighway 201 would

mean continued withdrawal of Class I agricultural land. (Figure 1)

Class I agricultural land is defined as land with few limitations

that restrict its use. These soils can be cropped intensively and

need only ordinary crop management practices to maintain their pro-

ductivity. The soils along Highway 201 are in the Owyhee (144A) and

Greenleaf (205A) series.'7 In addition to having the characteristics

of capability Class I, these two series have relatively high yield

potentials for the crops grown in this region. Furthermore, these

soils have few limitations for other uses such as septic tank absorp-

tion fields and other sanitary land fills, dwellings with and without

basements, small commercial buildings, and roads and streets.'8

Diversified capabilities of this land are responsible for the land

use competition which is occurring along Highway 201. The continued

commercial growth along Highway 201 will result in highly capable

agricultural land being permanently removed from agricultural produc-

tion:.
 QUESTIONNAIRE USED

One of the objectives of this study is to determine if an alter-

native arterial can be found for the needed commercial expansion

that will necessarily occur in order to slow or stop the continued

development along Highway 201. Continued growth along Highway 201

would surely mean continued loss of agriculturally productive land

which exists on both sides of the highway. To help find an alterna-

tive arterial, it was necessary to determine why businesses now located

along Highway 201 chose that particular site. It was believed that

the only way to determine the individual and aggregate reasons for

locating along Highway 201 was to ask as many of the resident business

entrepreneurs as possible why they chose their particular site. To do

this a questionnaire was developed with the intention of interviewing

the decision-makers of each business located along Highway 201.

Development of the Questionnaire

To determine what questions should be asked, a literature search

was made of some studies involving location and the location decision

process. It was determined from the literature review that there are

seven major location factors which decision-makers of commercial

activities often consider when choosing a location. These factors are:

1) The decision-maker; 2) land availability and cost; 3) hierarchial

order (supply and demand); 4) transferability of consumers; 5) scale;

6) location of other activities; and 7) constraints and incentives.19

(Appendix A)

Decision-maker. Decision-makers of commercial activities most

frequently have one primary goal: to maximize net profits. In addi-

 is'

tion to the profit motive decision-makers are subject to a multitude

of other conflicting motives, pressures, and valuations. These con-

flicts are often recorded as "personal reasons" by analyzers of loca-

tion decisions.2° They may, however, be indirectly related to other

location factors and caution should be taken against accepting personal

reasons as valid. These conflicts may also cause decision-makers to

find their optimum location through the means of trial and error.21

To help eliminate a category labeled "personal reasons" some questions

were designed to determine motives, pressures, and valuations of the

decision-maker.

Land availability and costs. The amount of land available in any

city is unique to that city, but one study showed that in twenty-eight

cities with a population from 5,000 to 50,000 about 30 per cent of the

retail activity was in the CBD where land is most scarce, yet takes up

only about 3 per cent of the city center. The remainder is divided

among arterials, major intersections, and residential neighborhoods.

About a per cent. of these three areas is occupied by retail trade.22

There is often surplus land zoned for commercial use in areas outside

the CBD. However, when establishments begin to concentrate even outside

the CBD land rents go up. Therefore, land availability in most cities

in this size class is not the most limiting factor, and cost becomes

the primary driving force.23 The presence of an existing structure on

available land may also enter into the decision process. Conversion

or reoccupation of an existing building often enables a firm to estab-

lish a business when the cost of new construction would be prohibitive.

In addition, the amount a firm can afford to pay for land will help
 12

determine the final location, and the amount of financing available

may help determine whether the land and building are in a fee simple

ownership or lease contract.24 To determine if cost and availability

of land was a determining factor, decision-makers were asked about

their understanding of relative land costs, availability of land,

ownership, and construction.

Hierarchial order (supply and demand). Commercial centers have

varying numbers of functions, and can be placed in hierarchial orders,

based upon these functions. The freestanding establishments represent

the lowest order coniiercial center; they generally have only one func-

tion and serve a relatively small number of people within a small

market area. In contrast, the highest order commercial center in a

regional context would be a CBD or regional shopping development with

40 to 200 functional units. Such a development would market conven-

ience goods, shoppers goods, and have service establishments.25 Devel-

opment along Highway 201 can be placed in the category of a regional

shopping center. It has over forty functional units with frequent dupli-

cation of many units. It markets convenience and shoppers goods, plus

it has service establishments. Business diversity, specifically the

number of retail establishments in an area, is a function of the

number of consumers or consumer aggregate purchasing power. Because

of this function, multiple purpose consumer shopping trips can en-

courage retailers of convenience goods to locate near high-order

shoppers goods stores and in this way increase their trade area.26

As mentioned previously, Ontario has a trade area which includes its

own residents plus those living in lower order centers. Therefore,

 13

decision-makers in the study area were questioned about their percep-

tions of their customers and where customers come from. It was also

determined whether the firms sell shoppers goods, convenience goods

or are service establishments, and whether their decision to locate on

Highway 201 was influenced by the size of the trade area.

Transferability of consumers. The location choice of firms is

intimately related to minimizing costs o-F consumer movement. Therefore,

spatial patterns are very closely tied to patterns of movement and

traffic flow in and around the city. Movement and traffic flow often

reflect lines of least resistance or greatest accessibility, and

coninercial activities tend to benefit from locating in the vicinity

of the point of minimum aggregate travel. Ribbon developments attempt

to reach the point of minimum aggregate travel by maximizing access

to vehicular traffic.27 If a choice of location is available, con-

sumers normally will prefer the one which involves the least effort

and most satisfaction. The logic behind transferability of consumers

is that if a retailer can save the customer travel time and energy,

the customer would logically transfer his purchases from other

stores.28 It has also been found that customers frequent stores on

the side of the Street they are traveling in, rather than cross against

traffic to visit stores on the opposite side. Therefore, the side of

the street with the greatest traffic flow will generally have a higher

trade density, as well as the most automobile sales and gas facili-

ties.29 To ascertain if retailers along Highway 201 considered transfer

of customers as a location factor, questions were asked pertaining to

their position along the arterial.

 14

Scale. The utility of a shopping trip to the customer increases

with the number of shops visited. Therefore, sales potential of a

retail center may be directly related to its size. A larger center

offers a wider range of goods and services, and attracts consumers

from a wider area than a smaller center in the same location.30

Retailers effectively increase the scale of operation by agglomerating

and establishing a reputation for a range of alternative sellers.

This creates a mutually beneficial advantage to the customer by in-

creasing the selection at one central location. Customers are usually

willing to travel only short distances to obtain one or two items, but

multiple purposes warrant a longer trip. This effectively increases

the trade area of a center.31

Some establishments locate on arterials to take advantage of con-

sumer patterns with regard to effective scale of agglomeration. How-

ever, many of them also have extraordinary space requirements. Some

space is required for showroom purposes, such as that used by automo-

bile, television, and appliance sales. Others may require external

space for automobile access and parking, such as grocery complexes.

Many relatively large users of land require less expensive sites and

therefore take advantage of the arterials leading out of the CBD.32

To determine if scale, site size, or agglomeration motives were a part

of the decision process, questions concerning these aspects were asked.

Location of other activities. There is a strong tendency for

certain types of activities to locate in close proximity to one another;

the results may be that attractive businesses have influencing powers

on the locational tendencies of other activities. For example, in one

 15

study estimating the success of retail businesses it was found that

women's clothing stores seem to do better when located near variety,

department, and shoe stores.33 In another study of 269 business cen-

ters excluding CBD's it was discovered that restaurants and bars have

a high frequency of being located next to grocery stores, but a low

frequency of being located next to theaters.34 This tendency of

similar kinds of activities to agglomerate enables businesses to

derive the advantages of scale economics. There is also an additional

advantage to shoppers good retailers. Customers are more likely to

do comparative shopping in stores which are located near one another.35

Conversely, competitors may find it advantageous not to locate

near one another. This is particularly true for planned centers,

because increased distances frequently increase the sales potential

of such centers.36 Pirating may also occur among competitors and is

often found in ribbon developments where planned shopping centers are

located.37 Because of the attractive and repelling powers of competi-

tors and associates, questions were asked about consideration for

location of other activities..

Constraints and incentives. There may be constraints and incen-

tives which override the location factors discussed to this point. A

zoning ordinance may prevent location at the optimal site. Or, perhaps

constraints and tnceittiveswill be the deciding factor when two or more

sites would be equally adequate. For instance, city services may be

available at one site and not another, or there may be neighboring

businesses which are willing to share water and sewage facilities.38

In order to determine the constraints and incentives which effect

 16

location decisions of residents along Highway 201, nontraditional

questions were included in the questionnaire.

In addition to the questions, each decision-maker was given a

list of five summary factors and was asked to rank each factor in order

of importance. This should help to quantify responses from the

questionnaire.

The value of the questionnaire will be partially determined by

the honesty of the respondents. Therefore, as much effort as possible

was made to insure the decision-makers that the information would be

confidential and the responses would be used only in the aggregate.

Administration of the Questionnaire

The goal was to interview every business decision-maker located

along Highway 201, but only 73 per cent were contacted; 11 per cent

were unavailable, 4 per cent were government offices, and 12 per cent

were absentee owners. However, all three of the major types of

commercial activity were represented in the development (service,

convenience goods, and shoppers goods), and all three responded to

the questionnaire. Of those interviewed 35 per cent were service

outlets, 17 per cent were convenience good stores with service,

22 per cent were shoppers good stores with service, 9 per cent were

strictly convenience good stores, and 17 per cent were strictly

shoppers good stores.

A one-on-one personal contact approach was used to administer the

questionnaire. Each owner, or decision-maker of the businesses in

the development was contacted. The interviewer explained to them that

Oregon State University was doing research in the area, trying to

 17

determine location factors for retail and service outlets, hoping to

help planning commissions become aware of the needs of retail and

service outlets. Every business contacted along the development

granted an interview and most showed a sincere interest in the project.

Summary of Questionnaire Results

It is believed that, over all, the questionnaire served its pur-

pose nicely. The purpose was to determine why each business along

Highway 201 chose its particular site. Seventy-three per cent of the

businesses along Highway 201 were interviewed. Any sample greater

than 60 per cent would generally be considered more than necessary to

show significant representation of the entire population.39 In addi-

tion to a good sample size, a solid cross section of the different

types of commercial activity was represented in the sample.

It is believed that West Park Plaza had great influence on the

growth of the development and the questionnaire supported this hypoth-

esis. West Park Plaza did not enter the development until it had

become a community commercial center, so the Plaza did not start the

development. However, following construction of West Park Plaza,

development along Highway 201 grew within less than five years into a

regional commercial center.

The questionnaire revealed some of the important location factors:

land price, traffic flow, availability of space, central location, and

customer accessibility. Location factors which were not considered

important were: personal reasons or accidents, location of competitors,

availability of city water and sewage facilities. (See Appendix B)

There were two factors of which no conclusions could be drawn

from the questionnaire. These were zoning and location of established

business activities. The questionnaire failed to ask enough questions

about zoning to make any concrete evaluations about its importance as

a location factor. Due to the fast growth of the development follow-

ing construction of West Park Plaza and 44 per cent of the businesses

considering its location, it can be concluded that West Park Plaza

had an effect on location. However, other business firms were only

considered by 30 per cent of the firms interviewed. Because of this

it is doubtful that location of business activities, other than West

Park Plaza, had much effect on the location decisions of businesses

along Highway 201.

A list of five factors believed to be important was given to each

respondent and they were asked to rank them in order of importance.

(Table 1) It was hoped that the ranking of these factors would show

the most and least important of the factors discussed in the question-

naire. The over all ranking of these factors showed central location

as the most important factor, customer access was second land price

third, lot size fourth, and zoning fifth. The rankings of first and

second, central location and customer access were very close. Only

5 per cent more of the businesses ranked central location first over

customer access. Therefore, the tio should probably be considered

as nearly equal in importance to businesses along Highway 201.

Factors ranked third and fourth were also closely matched. Only 1 per

cent of the businesses ranked land price in third place over lot size.

They too, should be considered as equally important. There was no

question about the fifth place ranking. Sixty-seven per cent of those
 19

interviewed ranked zoning in last place. Because of the failure

of the questionnaire to gain an understanding of zoning as a factor,

very few conclusions can be derived from the ranking of zoning as

least important. However, without proper zoning businesses could not

legally locate in the development. Therefore, it is believed that

zoning is of little concern, because most businesses would not con-

sider locations where proper zoning does not exist.

Earlier, the importance of protecting Class I agricultural land

was explained. If commercial firms are to be expected to by-pass

these lands, they must realize two things. First, they must realize

how important food productionis to the economy of Ontario and to

their success. Secondly, they must realize the location of Class I

agricultural land.

The questionnaire asked those interviewed to determine the impor-

tance of eight different economic sectors in the Ontario area. (Table

2) Food production was ranked as very important by 89 per cent of

those interviewed and 56 per cent said their success was most dependent

on food production. For Ontario, basic economic sectors are food pro-

duction, food processing, retail trade and professional services, and

construction. More than 50 per cent of the businesses located along

Highway 201 ranked all five basic sectors as very important to the

economy of Ontario. One hundred per cent realized that their success

was dependent on the success of other sectors in the local economy.

It is believed then that retailers and service outlets in this devel-

opment are aware of the importance of protecting Class I agricultural

land.
 TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RANKED FACTORS

Factors No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5

Central Location 35% 24% 19% 13% 9%

Customer Access 30% 41% 16% 10% 3%

Land Price 21% 8% 31% 25% 15%

Lot Size 10% 20% 30% 34% 6%

Zoning 4% 7% 4% 18% 67%

TABLE 2. ECONOMIC SECTOR RANKINGS

Very Somewhat Not Don't

Economic Sector Important Important Important Know

Retail Trade 80% 18% 0 2%

Finance, Insurance
& Real Estate 35% 39% 20% 6%

Wholesale Trade 19% 20% 54% 7%

Food Production 89% 5% 4% 2%

Government 19% 26% 46% 9%

Mining (Sand and Gravel) 9% 26% 61% 4%

Food Processing 85% 9% 4% 2%

Constructi on 56% 31% 11% 2%

 21

The questionnaire also asked what the SCS Land Classification was

for the site they are located on. Not one person interviewed knew

that their site was classified by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS)

as Class I agricultural land. There may be several reasons for the

negative reply. One may be the lack of knowledge of the term "SCS

Classification." Perhaps it should have been defined. Another may be

that they do not know how their site has been classified. If commer-

cial firms in the development are unaware that their expansion is

permanently removing Class I agricultural land from production, then

an educational campaign is necessary. It should be of particular

interest to businesses along Highway 201 because of the realization

they have of their dependence on food production.

OTHER POSSIBLE ARTERIALS

According to the responses from the questionnaire and the ranked

factors, location choices for commercial activities along Highway 201

include finding a locale which is central to potential customers,

easily accessible to customers, priced reasonably, and has lot sizes

large enough to accommodate extraordinary space requirements and

expansion. There are three other traffic arteries leading into the

city: North Oregon Street, East Idaho Street, and Arcadia Boulevard.

(Figure 2) However, none have all the important locational criteria.

North Oregon Street enters Ontario from the north and fails to be

centrally located for city residents and for secondary centers of Nyssa,

Vale, Payette, Fruitland, and Weiser. It would be more accessible to

 22

Payette, Weiser, and Fruitland but less accessible to Nyssa and Vale

than Highway 201. The lot sizes along North Oregon are relatively

small and the highway borders the freeway, preventing businesses from

building on the east side of the highway. There are presently highway

oriented businesses located along North Oregon, attracting business

from travelers of Interstate 80N. Two especially limiting factors

are lot size and inaccessability to Ontario, Nyssa, and Vale residents.

East Idaho Street enters Ontario from the east and has direct

access from Interstate 80N. It too is not centrally located for

Ontario residents and its hinterland. However, it does have easier

accessibility for Payette, Fruitland, and Weiser. East Idaho's most

limiting factor is space for expansion.

Arcadia Boulevard is more centrally located than the two other

alternatives and enters Ontario from the south. Its orientation is

similar to Highway 201. Accessibility is only slightly less for all

areas and space is abundant. However, it also crosses Class I agricul-

tural land. (Figure 2) Development of this arterial is no better than

continuing development along Highway 201.

The conclusion is that existing arterials are not suitable for

relieving conflicts along Highway 201. If development along Highway

201 continues as far as Cairo Junction, it would mean a loss of about

ninety acres of the best crop land in the county. This acreage estimation

is based only on development of lots on either side of the highway

and not beyond. However, continued com nercial development cannot be

expected to stop in Ontario. As stated earlier, retail and service

sectors are very important to the basic economy of Ontario. Their

FIGURE 2

K.

K
:x:.K

K
*
K
K
K
*
K
*
K I
4 4 K K
K
K
K
*
4
K
/
'- La4
L4.K*RI !&'
as
K K K K K K .._'4
K K K K K

KK**4
K K

x -- !
. -

l.LklI

RI6ON DEVEOPME?T

Airport
-r 'T1
! I

ITTT:'J1

LEGEND
Holy Rosary Hospital
a i r
CBD Central Business
Junction District
Class Agricultural Land
I

Road and Building

Foundation Limitations &
the lOOYearFIood Plain
0 100 200 ft. --Alternative Highway
 24

growth and developñient must be allowed to continue.

There is a possibility of continuing the growth of the Highway 201

development, but it would mean construction of a new highway. If

Highway 201 were extended north at airport corner to intersect Malheur

Drive, approximately the same amount of area as if development con-

tinued to Cairo Junction could be developed, and only twelve acres of

prime farmland would be lost. (Figure 2) The twelve acres includes land

needed to construct the highway and lots on either side of the highway.

It would be a little more difficult to develop this northern

section than the southern section because its soils have some road

foundation limitations, low building foundation limitations, and part

of the area is within the 100 year flood plain boundary. (Figure 2)

In addition, part of the area has septic tank absorption field limi-

tations. However, this is true of the area south also, and extending

city sewage lines north of airport corner could be less expensive than

extending them south.

The area south does not have the SCS designation of severe limi-

tations on roads and foundations as the area north does. However,

severe limitation designations by SCS does not necessarily mean there

is a restriction to development activity. Rather, it is a framework

for land use decisions and prior to construction, consideration of

potential problems and planning for their correction is necessary.4°

Concerning the area within the flood plain boundary, all building

foundations must be above the 100 year flood plain to be within the

regulations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act. Therefore, any

development in the flood plain boundaries would require enough fill to

raise the foundations of the buildings above the flood plain.

It is believed at this time that development north of airport

corner would satisfy the important location factors required by poten-

tial commercial enterprises in the Ontario area. It would offer them

about the same centrality as Highway 201, and it should increase

accessibility for some customers. It would probably not change access-

ibility for Nyssa, Vale, or for local residents. But it should increase

accessibility for Payette, Fruitland, and Weiser customers. In addi-

tion, the new highway may act as a by-pass and give the existing

development increased accessibility to Idaho customers. It is diffi-

cult to accurately predict what land prices in the new area might be,

but they should be comparable with existing development land prices.

The new area would also offer necessary lot sizes required by highway

development residents.

CONCLUSION

With the expected increase in population, particularly young

adults, service and retail trade industries can only increase and

become increasingly important to the economic well being of Ontario.

However, it must be remembered that service and retail trade, and all

other sectors in the economy of Ontario, are dependent on crop pro-

duction which is in turn dependent on agriculturally productive land.

Conflicts between commercial use of land and crop production are

not intrinsically a part of economic growth. A realization of both

needs and dedication to provide these needs may resolve conflicts which

occur. Development of a new highway from airport corner to Maiheur

 26

Drive is a definite possibility and it meets the criteria for location

choices established by decision-makers in the existing development

along Highway 201. In addition, it adds some protection to needed

prime farm land along Highway 201. It should resolve the present

conflict between commercial development along Highway 201 and crop

production. However, before such changes are made a more detailed

study of costs and benefits should be undertaken. The cost of devel-

oping the highway and making the necessary changes to remove limi-

tations may be greater than the benefits derived from protecting

Class I land along Highway 201. In addition to a cost-benefit

analysis, absolute compliance with the comprehensive plan for both

the city and the county would be necessary.

 APPENDICES

A. The Questionnaire 27

B. Analysis of the Questionnaire 35

 27

APPENDIX A

The Questionnaire

Firm Name

INTRODUCTION

I am Sylvia Clark, a graduate student at Oregon State University

from Nyssa. We are doing some research into reasons why activities

locate where they do. We feel that planners and community developers

do not understand all of the needs of retail and service activities

and would like to ask you some questions relating to your locational

needs.

May I have a few minutes of your time? I would like to assure you

that the questionnaire will be held in strict confidence and that the

results will only be used in the aggregate.

QUESTIONNAI RE

la. Does the business own, rent, or lease this property on which it

is located?

Own (go on to question lb.)

Rent (go to Q id.)

Lease (go to Q. ic.)

lb. Did you build orconvert an existing building?

Build (go to Q. ic.)

Convert (go to Q. ic.)

Other (Please specify):

 AI

ic. In what year was the property purchased?

id. In what year was the property first rented?

le. In what year was the property first leased?______________________

2a. Do you feel you paid a reasonable or unreasonable price for the

property in this area (Ontario)?

Reasonable (go to Q. 2b.)

Unreasonable (go to Q. 2b.)

2b. When you purchased this property did you contact a realtor or the

previous owner?

Realtor (go to Q. 3.)

Owner (go to Q. 2c.)

2c. What was the occupation of the person this property was purchased

from?_____________________________ (go to Q. 3.)

3. Was there major remodeling before you opened for business?

Yes

No

4. What year did you open for business at this location?

5. Did you use the land for any other purpose before building the

present business?

Yes (Describe the purpose: )

No

Now I would like to ask why you located on this site. First

6. How important was the price of the land to you....; was it:

Very important

Somewhat important

Not very important

Not a consideration
 29

7a. When you were looking for a site, did you prefer another location

but find that the land was not for sale?

Yes (go to Q. 7b.)

No (go to Q. 8.)

7b. In what area was the preferred site?

8. Did you think that land prices on this site were higher, lower, or

about the same as in other parts of the city?

Higher

Lower

About the same

Don't know

9. When you located on this site was Highway 201 a major traffic

artery leading into Ontario?

Yes

10. What other traffic arteries, if any, did you consider as possible

location sites?

ha. Was there any particular reason why you chose this side of the

street to locate on?

Yes (go to Q. hib.)

No (go to Q. 12.)

hib. What was the reason?____________________________________________

12. Did you consider the traffic flow when you located here?

Yes
 Ii]

13. Do you recall what this area you are now in was zoned when you

established here?

14. About how many business establishments were in this development

when you located here?____________________________________________

15. Did the location of West Park Plaza enter into your decision

process when you located here?

Yes

No

16. Do you happen to recall what was located on each side of you

when you opened for business?_____________________________________

17. If they are no longer here, what happened: Did they go out of

business, relocate, or what?___________________________________

18a. Did you consider the location of other business firms when locat-

ing here?

Yes (go to Q. 18b.)

No (go to Q. 19.)

18b. Why was their location a consideration?_________________________

18c. Did any other local business encourage you to locate here?_______

18d. Did any business discourage you?_____________________________

19. Did the number of other business activities in this development

encourage or discourage you from locating here?

Encourage

Discourage

No effect
 31

20. Were you discouraged from locating elsewhere because of competition?

Yes

No

21. Did your particular space requirements effect your decision to

locate here, rather than on another site?

Yes

No

22a. Do you require a relatively large amount of space for parking,

display, or storage?

Yes (go to Q. 22b.)

No (go to Q. 23.)

22b. Was the space requirement a consideration for locating here?

Yes (go to Q. 22c.)

No (go to Q. 23.)

22c. Did the availability of space in this development allow you to

consider expanding your business space?

Yes

No

23a. Are you on city water and sewage facilities?

Water: Sewer:

Yes (go to Q. 23b.) Yes (go to Q. 23b.)

No (go to Q. 23c.) No (go to Q. 23c.)

23b. Were city services available when you came here?

Yes (go to Q. 24.)

No (go to Q. 24.)
 32

23c. Do you share services with anyone else?

Yes

No

24. Was the availability of sewer and water services an important

consideration in your decision to locate here?

Important

Not important

25. Do you happen to know if your customers do comparative shopping

with your competitors?

Yes they do

No they do not

26. Do you think that customers who visit your store also visit other

stores in this development during the same trip?

Yes they do

No they do not

27a. Do you have customers from outside the Ontario area? i.e., from

Nyssa, Vale, Payette, Weiser, Etc.)

Yes (go to Q. 27b.)

No (go to Q. 28.)

27b. From where?

Nyssa, Vale, Payette, Fruitland, Weiser,

Other (List most important: )

27c. Which customers from outside Ontario did you expect?

Nyssa, Vale, Payette, Fruitland, Weiser

 33

28. Do you think this particular location increased trade with .....

Nyssa residents, or not? How about Vale? Payette,

Fruitland, Weiser

29a. When you located here did you happen to consider locating within

the city center, or not?

Yes (go to Q. 2gb.)

No (go to Q. 30.)

29b. Why didn't you?

30a. Is this a relocation or a primary location within the Ontario area?

Relocation (go to Q. 30b.)

Primary location (go to Q. 31.)

30b. Did you increase, decrease, or not change your store size when

you moved?

Increased

Decreased

No change

31. Are there any other considerations which we have not discussed

that you feel influenced your location decision?________________

Now, I would like to ask you a few general questions relating to the

economy of the Ontario area .....

32a. First, there are several different economic sectors in the area.

As I read a few of them would you please tell me if they are very

important, somewhat important, not important, or do not know how

important, to the economy of Ontario?

 34

Economic Sector V.1. 5.1. N.I. D.K.

Retail trade

Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate

Wholesale trade

Food production

Government

Mining sand and gravel

Food processing

Construction

32b. Think about the industries you said were important.. .which one

would you say is most important for the Ontario area?__________

33a. Do you feel that your success is dependent on the success of

other sectors in the local economy or not?

Yes (go to Q. 33b..)

No (go to Q. 34.)

33b. Which one are you most dependent on?_________________________

34a. Do you, happen to know the SCS Land Classification of this site?

Yes (go to Q. 34b.)

No

34b. What is the SCS Classification?

OBSERVATIONS

1. Is this a shopping goods store, convenience goods store, or a

service outlet?

Shopping goods, Convenience goods, Service

 APPENDIX B

Analysis of the Questionnaire

The goal was to interview every business decision-maker located

along Highway 201. However, only 73 per cent were contacted; 11 per

cent were unavailable, 4 per cent were government offices, and 12 per

cent were absentee owners. However, all three of the major types of

commercial activity were represented in the development (service,

convenience goods, and shoppers goods) and all three responded to the

questionnaire. Of those interviewed 35 per cent were service outlets,

17 per cent were convenience goods stores with service, 22 per cent

were shoppers goods stores with service, 9 per cent were strictly

convenience goods stores, and 17 per cent were strictly shoppers goods

stores. All responses to each question were tabulated and percentages

were calculated to determine what per cent of those interviewed an-

swered each question in a similar manner.

Ownership

The first few questions were concerned with ownership and property

purchasing to help determine investment responsibility and the date

each opened for business. It was hoped that the data would show what

influence West Park Plaza had on the growth of development along

Highway 201. Of those interviewed, 6 per cent owned the property on

which the business was located, and 37 per cent rented or leased the

property. Most (65 per cent) of the businesses built new buildings

prior to opening for business and the remainder converted existing

buildings, or bought an existing business. It is assumed from the

amount of initial investment required for property purchase, new

 36

buildings, or renovation of existing. buildings, that owners believed

this to be their optimum location. It is also assumed that the owners

had enough information on their location to rule out the possibility

of trial and error being the method used to find the optimum location.

Apparently West Park Plaza, built in 1971, did have an effect on

the growth of the study area. About 70 per cent of the present busi-

nesses opened for business following construction of West Park Plaza.

However, only about half added new buildings to the development. The

other 35 per cent purchased existing buildings that were being used

as residences or for other business activities.

Location Factors

Cost of property can have an influence on location.41 Therefore,

questions were asked about land prices. Of those that purchased

property, 79 per cent felt they paid a reasonable price for the property.

Most (62 per cent) did not purchase the property through a realtor,

which may have some effect on land price. Of those interviewed, 39

per cent thought the price of land, either purchased, leased, or

rented, was very important; 26 per cent thought it was somewhat impor-

tant; 15 per cent not very important; 15 per cent not a consideration;

and 5 per cent gave no reply. Fifty per cent thought land prices along

Highway 201 were higher than other parts of the city, 35 per cent

thought they were about the same, 7.5 per cent thought they were lower,

and 7.5 per cent did not know. Of those that thought land prices were

higher, 40 per cent were relatively close to West Park Plaza, and

another 7.5 per cent were in the section closest to the city center.

Most in the section furthest from city center and West Park Plaza
 37

thought prices were about the same, or lower than in other parts of

the city. Even though most thought land price was important and that

prices. in the development were higher, they did not prefer another

site above the one they occupied. Only 20 per cent preferred another

site, and 50 per cent of those preferred another site along Highway 201.

There have been cases where the decision to start a business

follows the purchase of property.42 In this case all land was pur-

chased for the purpose of starting the existing businesses. However,

10 per cent were leased to farmers, residents, or other retailers

prior to opening the present business.

Amount and direction of traffic can have an effect on location,

and 98 per cent of those interviewed considered Highway 201 a major

traffic artery leading into Ontario when they located there.43

However, only 32 per cent considered locating on other traffic arteries.

Half of the respondents had a specific reason for choosing the side of

street they were located on,butonly one-fourth of those gave as their

reason anything to do with traffic. Still, 80 per cent of those inter-

viewed did consider traffic flow when they chose their site along

Highway 201. Only 20 per cent did not consider traffic flow. Apparently

amount of traffic is important, while traffic direction has less effect.

It is commonly believed that zoning has a direct effect on land

use patterns, and it may have in this development also.44 However,

11 per cent of those in the development did not know what the land

they were located on was zoned, and 26 per cent thought it was zoned

other than commercial when they located in the development. The

remaining 63 per cent did not locate in the development until it was
zoned commercial.

The situation of other businesses often has an effect on location,

but it seems to have only a border line effect on businesses along

Highway 2O1. Forty-four per cent considered the location of West

Park Plaza, and 30 per cent considered the location of other business

firms. Very few businesses seemed to have suffered significantly

because of neighbors. Fifty-eight per cent of the businesses have

the same neighbors they began with, and 34 per cent had vacant lots

adjacent to them. Therefore, only 8 per cent changed neighbors. Of

those 8 per cent, one-half went out of business, and the other one-

half changed location.

In addition to specific neighbors, the number of other commercial

activities can affect location.46 Half of those interviewed thought

the number of other activities in the development encouraged them to

locate there. The other 50 per cent said numbers had no effect.

Location of competitors can effect location decisions, but this

does not seem to be the case for those located along Highway 201.

Only 6 per cent considered the location of competitors as a discouraging

factor, and yet, 89 per cent thought their customers did comparative

shopping with competitors. Eighty-five percent thought their customers

visited other stores in the development during the same shopping trip.

Extraordinary space requirements are a common characteristic of

businesses which locate in highway developments.48 According to those

interviewed 65 per cent of businesses along Highway 201 require rela-

tively large amounts of space for parking, display, and/or storage.

Fifty-four per cent of the businesses considered locating in the

 39

development because of particular space requirements. In addition,

44 per cent felt availability of space in the development has allowed

them to consider expanding business.

Many businesses do not find an optimal location the first time.49

Of those interviewed, 40 per cent said this was a relocation for them,

suggesting that previous locations were not optimum. There were many

different reasons given for relocating, but 82 per cent said they

increased their store size when they moved. This further illustrates

the importance of size and space.

One constraint which may prevent businesses from locating at the

optimum site is availability of water and sewage facilities.50 Seventy

per cent of the businesses along Highway 201 are on city water services,

and 75 per cent are on city sewage services. Even with the high per-

centage of city water and sewage facility users, only 41 per cent con-

sidered availability of city services an important location considera-

tion, while 59 per cent thought it was not important.

Ease of accessibility by consumers and distance they must travel

both affect location decisions.51 Highway 201 is easily accessible

to potential customers in Ontario, Nyssa, and Vale. The development is

moderately accessible to Fruitland, Payette, and Weiser customers.

The development is also relatively centrally located to these areas.

It is therefore not surprising that 98 per cent of the businesses

have customers from outside the Ontario area. Ninety-six per cent

had customers from Nyssa and Vale, 89 per cent had customers from

Payette and Fruitland, and 93 per cent had customers from Weiser.

When these businesses located along Highway 201, 91 per cent expected
 40

customers from Nyssa, Vale, and Fruitland. Ease of accessibility is

high for Nyssa and Vale residents, and Fruitland is relatively close.

Eighty-nine per cent of the businesses expected customers from Payette

and Weiser. Payette customers have the second least distance to

travel, but must come through the city center, which decreases access-

ibility. Weiser customers have much less accessibility and have a

greater distance to travel than Payette, and yet they were expected

by a large share of businesses. This can not be explained by the

questionnaire results. When asked to compare their present location

with other possible locations, 63 per cent felt that their present

location increased trade with Nyssa and Vale residents, and 46 per cent

felt it increased trade with Payette, Fruitland, and Weiser residents.

Overall distance and accessibility by customers to the city center

is about the same as the ribbon development. Distance increases

slightly for Nyssa and Vale residents, and accessibility is greater for

Payette, Fruftland and Weiser residents, but less for Nyssa and Vale

residents. In spite of this, only 22 per cent of the businesses

considered locating in the city center. Of those that did consider

locating in the city center, most (58 per cent) said space was the

limiting factor. The second most limiting factor was cost (25 per

cent).

Ranked Factors

The questionnaire identified some factors which are important to

conercial enterprises. To determine which factors were most or least

important, each person interviewed was asked to rank five common factors

according to their importance. (Table 1) Central location was ranked

 41

number one by 35 per cent of those interviewed, and customer access was

ranked number two 41 per cent of the time. Central location was

ranked either first or second 59 per cent of the time, and customer

access was ranked either first or second 71 per cent of the time.

Factors ranked third and fourth were also closely matched. Land price

was ranked third by 31 per cent, and fourth by 25 per cent, but lot

size was ranked third by 30 per cent, and ranked fourth by 34 per cent.

Zoning was definitely ranked least important. It was ranked fifth by

67 per cent of the respondents.

According to location theory, the central city is generally the

most central location.52 It seems very incongruous that businesses

located on a ribbon development would rank central location as the

most important factor. This incongruency is further exemplified by

those who looked at the central city as a possible location site. They

did not rank central location number one. Only 25 per cent of those

who considered locating in the central city ranked central location

number one, compared to 35 per cent over all. In contrast, 41 per

cent of those who did not consider the central city as a possible site

ranked central location as the most important factor. One possible

explanation, in the case of Ontario, is that the central city may not

be centrally located for customers. Another possibility is that the

city center and the fringe area development are relatively close caus-

ing them to be considered equally central.

Traffic arteries are commonly believed to be easily accessible to

customers.53 Therefore, it is not surprising that customer access is

ranked high by those located along Highway 201. It is also not surpris-
 42

ing that of those which considered other traffic arteries, most

(47 per cent) ranked customer access as most important. Those which

did not look at other traffic arteries as possible location sites

ranked central location as most important. This further supports the

possibility that the area under study is central to customers in the

area.

Land price was ranked third overall, but 40 per cent either ranked

it fourth or fifth. Ranking.land price third, next to central location

and customer access, is not surprising. If a retailer is not located

where he/she can be easily reached either through short distance or

accessibility, it does not matter what price he/she paid for land.

Land price was more important for those who felt they paid a reasonable

price for land than those who paid an unreasonable price. Most (30

per cent) who paid a reasonable price ranked land price as most

important. Most (40 per cent) of those who paid an unreasonable price

ranked land price fourth.

Some studies have shown that businesses which locate in ribbon

developments often require large amounts of space.54 This is also

true for Highway 201. Sixty-five per cent said they required a

relatively large amount of space, and yet most (34 per cent) ranked

lot size fourth. When separating those that required space and those

that did not, there was little difference in the ranked position of

lot size.

Until recently, zoning has not been applied or enforced outside

city limits. This may account for the lack of concern for zoning.

Zoning was ranked as least important by 67 per cent of those inter-

 43

viewed. Most of the present businesses did not locate in the develop-

ment until after a considerable part of the area was annexed and zoned

commercial. Therefore, some of the lack of concern for zoning may be

based on the fact that most decision-makers only consider those loca-

tions that are zoned commercial.

Understanding Economic Sectors

The respondents were asked to explain the importance of eight

separate economic sectors for the Ontario area. (Table 2) It was

believed that an understanding of the importance of food production

is necessary if Class I agricultural land is to be protected. Under-

standing of each important economic sector was high. Eighty-nine

per cent of those interviewed realized food production was very

important to the economy of Ontario. Forty-two per cent thought it

was the most important sector, and 56 per cent thought their business

was most dependent on food production. For Ontario, basic economic

sectors are food production, food processing, retail trade and pro-

fessional services, and construction. More than 50 per cent of the

businesses located along Highway 201 ranked all five basic sectors

as very important to the economy of Ontario. One hundred per cent

realized that their success was dependent on the success of other

sectors in the local economy.

They were not aware, however, that the land they were located on

has been classified by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) as Class I

agricultural land. This may have been the fault of the question.

Perhaps the term "SCS Classificationu should have been defined.

 44

FOOTNOTES

1 Mark B. Lapping, "Symposium: Agriculture and Urbanization,"

Journal of the American Institute of Planners, Vol. 41(1975),

p. 241.

2 Bill Clark, and Don Coppack, Comprehensive Planning Program for

Malheur County, Nyssa, Ontario, Vale: Background Report, Volume

IV, Land Capabilities and Natural Resources (Vale, Oregon: Malheur

County LCDC Office, 1976), p. 21, and 69.

3 Center for Population Research and Census, Population Bulletin,

State of Oregon, Population Projections for Oregon and Its Counties:

1975 - 2000 (Portland, ORegon: Portland State University, 1976),

p. 4.

4. William L. Garrison, et al, Studies of Highway Development and

Geographic Change (Seattle, Washington: University of Washington

Press, 1959), pp. 39 - 66.

5 IL I. Wolfe, "Effects of Ribbon Development on Traffic Flow,"

Traffic Quarterly, Vol. 18 (1964), p. 105.

6 Oregon Department of Transportation, Ontario, Oregon: Economic

Growth Center Before Study (Salem, Oregon: Department of Trans-

portation, 1974), p. 11.

7 Brian J. L. Berry, Conercial Structure and Commercial Blight

(Chicago: University of Chicago, Department of Geography,

Research Paper No. 85, 1963), p. 5.

8 Center for Population Research and Census, op. cit., footnote 3,

p. 4.
 9 Bill Clark, and Don Coppack, Comprehensive Planning Program for

Maiheur County, Nyssa, Ontario, Vale: Background Report, Volume I,

Economics and Population (Vale, Oregon: Malheur County LCDC

Office, 1976), p. 77.

10 Center for Population Research and Census, op. cit., footnote 3,

p. 38.

11 Clark, and Coppack, op. cit., footnote 9, p. 26.

12 Clark, and Coppack, op. cit., footnote 9, p. 71.

13 Clark, and Coppack, op. cit., footnote 9, p. 25.

14 Ray M. Northam, Urban Geography (New York: John Wiley & Sons,

1975), p. 224.

15 Northam, op. cit., footnote 14, p. 230.

16 James Simmons, The Changing Pattern of Retail Location (Chicago:

University of Chicago, 1964), p. 111.

17 U. S. D. A. Soil Conservation Service, Draft Report on Soils in

Northeastern Maiheur County (In Press).

18 Nyle C. Brady, The Nature and Property of Soils, 8th Edition

(New York: MacMillian Publishing Co., 1974), p. 248.

19 Simmons, op. cit., footnote 16, p. 153, David M. Smith, Industrial

Location (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1971), p. 480, and Peter

Toyne, Organization, Location, and Behavior: Decision-Making in

Economic Geography (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1974), p. 259.

20 P. M. Townroe, "Locational Choice and the Individual Firm,"

Regional Studies, Vol. 3 (1969), p. 15.

21 Charles M. Tiebout, "Location Theory, Emperical Evidence, and

Economic Evaluation," Papers and Proceedings of the Regional

 46

Science Association, Vol. 3 (1957), P. 78.

22 Harland Bartholomew, Land Uses in American Cities (Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1955), p. 78.

23 Simmons, op. cit., footnote 16, p. 95, and Smith, op. cit.,

footnote 19, p. 282.

24 Smith, op. cit., footnote 19, p. 39, and Toyne, op. cit.,

footnote 19, p. 176.

25 Northam, op. cit., footnote 14, p. 224.

26 R. Lakshmanan, and Walter G. Hansen, "A Retail Market Potential

Model ," Journal of the American Insti tute of Planners, Vol. 31

(1965), p. 134, and Simmons, op. cit., footnote 16, p. 23.

27 Garrison, op. cit., footnote 4, p. 57, and Northam, op. cit.,

footnote 14, p. 243.

28 Brian J. L. Berry, Geography of Market Centers and Retail Distri-

bution (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1967), p. 3,

and Simmons, op. cit., footnote 16, p. 21.

29 Brian J. L. Berry, "Ribbon Development in the Urban Business

Pattern," Annals of the Association of American Geographers,

Vol, 49 (1959), p. 45.

30 Simmons, op. cit., footnote 16, p. 23, and Lakshmanan and Hansen,

op. cit., footnote 26, p. 135.

31 Toyne, op. cit., footnote 19, p. 64, and Berry, op. cit., footnote

28, p. 3.

32 Berry, op. cit., footnote 28, p. 46, footnote 7, p. 23, and Toyne,

op. cit., footnote 19, p. 181.

33 Garrison, op. cit., footnote 4, p. 42.

I

47

34 Garrison, op. cit., footnote 4, p. 75.

35 Berry, op. cit., footnote 7, p. 24.

36 William Alonzo, Location and Land Use (Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1964), p. 118.

37 Simmons, op. cit., footnote 16, p. 111.

38 Toyne, op. cit., footnote 19, p. 68.

39 Survey Center, Agriculture Hall (Corvallis, Oregon: Oregon State

University, 1978), Verbal Communication.

40 U. S. 0. A. Soil Conservation Service, op. cit., footnote 17.

41 Simmons, op. cit., footnote 16, P. 95.

42 Tiebout, op. cit., footnote 21, p. 82.

43 Berry, op. cit., footnote 29, p. 45.

44 Peter Toyne, op. cit., footnote 19, p. 68.

45 Garrison, op. cit., footnote 4, p. 73.

46 Berry, op. cit., footnote 7, p. 24.

47 Alonzo, op. cit., footnote 36, p. 118.

48 Toyne, op. cit., footnote 19, p. 181.

49 Tiebout, op. cit., footnote 21, p. 78.

50 Toyne, op. cit., footnote 19, p. 68.

51 Garrison, op. cit., footnote 4, p. 57.

52 Northam, op. cit., footnote 14, p. 189.

53 Garrison, op. cit., footnote 4, p. 57.

54 Berry, op. cit., footnote 28, p. 46.